I have read and enjoyed your essay "Aikido Activism."

http://www.tribe.net/thread/dcc39a92-9db3-4268-a1df-c365d51502ed?tribeid=8e5a3310-812c-4197-b2ec-6e2b3435b602 

While it offers some genuinely fresh insight, my overall impression is "yet another..."
Specifically, it reads like yet another attempt to make some (if not all)
of the rubrics of capitalism palatable to its discontents, such as myself.
Some try to slide it under the door or down the chimney.
Some marry it to positive concepts, as with the "social entrepreneur" fad.
And then of course is that other intellectual fad, the "meme,"
which proposes a selfishness-based model for virtually everything
and is an especially clever and benign method for re-introducing
Social Darwinism into the public consciousness.
Your approach seems to be a standby of public relations...rewriting the dictionary.
Replace an emotionally loaded and rhetorically shopworn word ("profit"?) with a word having
connotations of youthfulness and self-empowerment, viz. Aikido.

Nevertheless, you envision the triumph of the commons.
That is some bait you got there, almost as appealing as the meek inheriting the earth.
Perhaps something as lofty as the triumph of the commons is worth making some sacrifices for,
but few things do I cherish more than my world-view, it being my life's work.
In my world view are found (among other things) capitalism-without-adjectives and 
exploitation-without-adjectives.

Let me let you in on something something.  When I was wasting my time getting a college 
education, I took
a few semesters of Russian.  In 4th semester Russian, I was subjected to an "oral exam."
I was fortunate to be examined by a faculty member who happened to be a native speaker.
These were somewhat exotic on American campuses back then.  My assigned task was to give (in Russian, of course) verbal directions from some campus landmark to another.  Afterward, I was 
told (in English) that I passed the test, but with some interesting feedback.
Apparently the examiner was impressed with my ability to form valid Russian sentences and
even communicate complex ideas using
almost no modifiers whatsoever.  I didn't know what to make of this.  At first I assumed it 
demonstrated
a weakness in my studies concerning the declension of adjectives, but
since then I have noticed the tendency in my English usage and started to wonder if it has 
something to do with the way I'm wired.

That aside, I would like to share my own proposals for practical activism.
While you have "aikido activism," I have what I have called "pubwan:"

http://geocities.com/n8chz/PubwanWiki/WelcomePage.html

As part of this modest proposal, I drafted a set of principles characteristic
of movements that are "pubwan" (see, sometimes I use adjectives).

http://geocities.com/n8chz/whatis.htm

After reading about Aikido Activism, I recalled that I put a lot of effort into
crafting a "whatis" statement that positions my proposed movement well within
what you would term the "Not-for-Aikido sector."
My conception of pubwan started with the awareness of data mining,
initially in the form of the dupermarket loyalty card.
The idea was to create a database with which consumers might collectively
"discover knowledge" about the retail trade and its tricks by studying the
distribution of prices across time, space and "specification."

The first discovery was that I had re-invented the "shop bot."
I found shop bots (in general) to be informational middlemen,
and greedy ones at that, with their blind auction models and
"safeguarding" of proprietary "bulk data" through "webfuscation."
Due to my gift for oversimplification, I decided that the alternative
to the shop bot should be nonprofit, nonproprietary, nonpolitical
and non-Aikido.

Further refinement of my "pubwan" ideas led to some interesting discoveries.
The study of retail marketing leads to the study of the dismal science.
This, in turn, introduced two dismal adjectives to my vocabulary.
These are the adjectives that practitioners of the dismal science
love to beat leftists like me over the head with:

normative

positive

N33dless to say, I immediately self-identified as a "hard core normativist,"
rejecting empiricism.  I constructed what I call a "normative specification,"
or NormSpec.  My re-working of the "pubwan" concept then took on a begrudging
empirical bent.  The MaxhiSchema substitutes preferences for requirements,
and starts with an assumption that all decisions involve tradeoffs.

Eventually I seem to have ended up with a "bend not break" model
of decision making perhaps in some ways suggestive of Aikido and its ilk.
Still, since the primary mission proposed for pubwan is the "correction" of
InformationAsymmetry, it is hoped that not all "Transformative Technologies"
must offer intellectual property protections.  Surely if the commons can
triumph, so can "intellectual nonproperty."

It should be evident that my queasiness about Aikido Activism is more
cultural than conceptual. I (and some of my ancestors, as well as most
among my contemporaries that I consider "allies") have a lot of emotion
and effort invested in struggle against capitalism-without-adjectives.
The addition (or subtraction) of adjectives cannot make this bitter pill
any more palatable to me.  I see potential for your Aikido Activism, but
don't see myself doing it without seeming to have "bought into" one of those
Kevin Kelley-type intellectual fads.  Next thing you know I'll be making
"elevator pitches" or "establishing my brand" or something and won't be 
recognizable as the me I know and love.
At a purely intellectual level, I'm basically sold on the idea that
there's no possibility of an end-run around capitalism-without-adjectives,
but is it ever a bitter pill.

For a while at least, I wish to practice (or at least preach) activism-without-adjectives.

Attached to the Aikido Activism article at the tribe is an anecdote (from one Sojo) illustrative
of the fact that being a contributing member of society is a privilege not a right.
As one of those introvert reject types, I couldn't read it without my blood boiling.
This does not illustrate the workings of a reckless adolescent mind, but
a calculating adversary with no socially redeeming value.
You sink my boat and I'll sink yours or die trying.
I hope the sunken boats, even of spoiled rotten first world countries like my own,
become the most embittered political force yet, becoming a splitting
migraine not only for free market fundamentalists, but for proponents of
"darwinian" (including memetic) models of ANYTHING.

I really needed to get that rant out of my system.
Please forgive me for losing my cool in cyberdiscourse.
Anyway, back to your Aikido concept.
You see the dichotomy between profit and nonprofit sectors as unfortunate.
I've always viewed the profit motive as akin to a proverbial camel in a proverbial tent.
I doubt that profit can be "a" goal without becoming "the" goal.
I am skeptical of the "moderate profit" initiative, at least assuming
competition remains a feature of society.
It seems akin to the practice of "point shaving" in "competitive" sports.
Perhaps profit (like any other normative objective) can be "maximized with low priority"
("maxlo" in the MaxhiSchema).

I'm still committed to the theory that impoverishment and marginalization CAN be de-linked,
à la Paul Goodman (see his "Like a Conquered Province").
Certainly "open source" and "not for profit" can be de-linked, at least so far, as
in parts of the Distro Zoo.

I think part of the absolutism behind the profit/nonprofit dichotomy comes from the IRS.
They have an anal retentive need to classify economic assets as "income producing" or
"not income producing."  This is because the former are "depreciable" and the latter
are "non depreciable."  This is why the only way around "eating" a capital loss on
your house is by becoming a slumlord.  
The idea that assets are "capital" or "consumable"
pre-dates the IRS, of course.  As far as I can tell, it was invented within the private sector 
for the private purpose of enforcing principal-agent relationships.
It seems to be based on the Calvinist/Hobbesian assumption that humyn beings, left to their
own devices, are (among other things) lazy and will consume more than they produce, sinking all 
boats.  According to the IRS, if your individual proprietorship
isn't profitable (in the accounting sense) at least 60% of the time, you have what is
known as a "hobby."  Accounting (like capitalism-without-adjectives itself) was invented as a 
technology for harnessing humyn and capital assets, while lighting a fire under the buns
of the former with ingenious performance metrics.
Good luck breaking the dichotomy.

Check out the use of the terms "tool" and "toy" in my "city that never sleeps" entry
at halfbakery.com.  I am currently trying to devise SwarSchema models labeling graph vertices
as "X as tool," "X as toy" etc.  Perhaps Aikido Activists also have uses for such models.